The FAQ calls out that certain things don't fall into a Fighter weapon group, so they can't benefit from Weapon Training, but what about the Weapon Master archetype that doesn't choose a group, but a specific weapon?
Can there be a Kinetic Blast Weapon Master?
And can a kineticist benefit from Inspire Courage or a Medium's Champion shared seance bonus? This part:
When it comes to modifiers that affect weapon damage rolls, or simply “damage rolls” (such as the bonus on damage rolls from Point-Blank Shot, inspire courage, and smite evil), special abilities that deal damage on a successful attack roll, apply them on hit point damage only, and only once per casting or use, rather than once per attack.
Seems to say that they can.
Next, this part:
In the same vein as abilities like Arcane Strike that affect a character’s weapons, abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon” almost never work with special abilities because such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon.”
seems to say that they won't work for natural attacks unless you are a monk. Does that mean a Bloodrager with Blooded Arcane Strike and a bloodline that gets claws can't benefit from it?
Lastly, there's a typo in the third paragraph:
(for instance, the occultis’s
should be "occultist's".
Thanks!
I'm confused about this section.
In the same vein as abilities like Arcane Strike that affect a character’s weapons, abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon” almost never work with special abilities because such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon.”
Does this mean that such abilities also don't work with natural weapons or unarmed strikes because they are not "manufactured" weapons? I would have assumed that the phrase "with a melee weapon" would include claws, for example. But if that is actually shorthand for "manufactured melee weapon" then I'm not so sure.
I feel like it might be better to use "with a weapon" as shorthand for "with a weapon not created by a spell as a weapon-like effect". It would make little sense for natural weapon Bloodragers to suddenly lose access to Arcane Strike, even though it was clearly intended for Bloodragers to be able to Arcane Strike (Blooded Arcane Strike feat) and for Bloodragers to be able to use natural weapons (Draconic bloodline). I'm pretty sure this FAQ was released in part to prevent abuse of Arcane Strike augmenting damaging spells.I'm confused about this section.
In the same vein as abilities like Arcane Strike that affect a character’s weapons, abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon” almost never work with special abilities because such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon.”Does this mean that such abilities also don't work with natural weapons or unarmed strikes because they are not "manufactured" weapons? I would have assumed that the phrase "with a melee weapon" would include claws, for example. But if that is actually shorthand for "manufactured melee weapon" then I'm not so sure.
I don't think this section would affect Arcane Strike since it was addressed in the previous paragraph. I think the paragraph that I quoted is for other abilities that lack Arcane Strike's broader language of "weapons."
The FAQ calls out that certain things don't fall into a Fighter weapon group, so they can't benefit from Weapon Training, but what about the Weapon Master archetype that doesn't choose a group, but a specific weapon?
Can there be a Kinetic Blast Weapon Master?
And can a kineticist benefit from Inspire Courage or a Medium's Champion shared seance bonus? This part:
When it comes to modifiers that affect weapon damage rolls, or simply “damage rolls” (such as the bonus on damage rolls from Point-Blank Shot, inspire courage, and smite evil), special abilities that deal damage on a successful attack roll, apply them on hit point damage only, and only once per casting or use, rather than once per attack.Seems to say that they can.
Next, this part:
In the same vein as abilities like Arcane Strike that affect a character’s weapons, abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon” almost never work with special abilities because such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon.”seems to say that they won't work for natural attacks unless you are a monk. Does that mean a Bloodrager with Blooded Arcane Strike and a bloodline that gets claws can't benefit from it?
Lastly, there's a typo in the third paragraph:
(for instance, the occultis’sshould be "occultist's".
Thanks!
Kinetic Blast Weapon Master would require 20 levels of Fighter, and that you can actually use Kinetic Blasts (i.e. create them). You can't, therefore it's impossible.
And yes, the Kinetic Blasts would benefit from them.
I suspect that's referring to the Weapon Master Fighter archetype.
|
So the half orc FCB for occultist (+1/2 damage with focus powers) used with the Telekinetic Mastery focus power to "violent thrus"t (attacks with objects/creatures per caster level) only gets the FCB on one attack from the focus power?Yep, one attack/rd.
Even though the bonus to damage isn't tied to attack rolls? For example it works with the area effect focus powers.
I suspect that's referring to the Weapon Master Fighter archetype.
Yes, that. Sorry, I forgot about the Weapon Master class ability.
I mean specifically the Weapon Master Fighter archetype.
Thanks for clarifying for me!
Even though the bonus to damage isn't tied to attack rolls? For example it works with the area effect focus powers.So the half orc FCB for occultist (+1/2 damage with focus powers) used with the Telekinetic Mastery focus power to "violent thrus"t (attacks with objects/creatures per caster level) only gets the FCB on one attack from the focus power?Yep, one attack/rd.
That does seem weird.
Something else just occurred to me.
In the same vein as abilities like Arcane Strike that affect a character’s weapons, abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon” almost never work with special abilities because such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon.”
Weapon Finesse (Combat)
You are trained in using your agility in melee combat, as opposed to brute strength.Benefit: With a light weapon, rapier, whip, or spiked chain made for a creature of your size category, you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on attack rolls. If you carry a shield, its armor check penalty applies to your attack rolls.
Special: Natural weapons are considered light weapons.
Wouldn't this also mean that you couldn't use Weapon Finesse and touch spells or weapon-like spells?
Something else just occurred to me.
In the same vein as abilities like Arcane Strike that affect a character’s weapons, abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon” almost never work with special abilities because such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon.”Weapon Finesse (Combat)
You are trained in using your agility in melee combat, as opposed to brute strength.Benefit: With a light weapon, rapier, whip, or spiked chain made for a creature of your size category, you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on attack rolls. If you carry a shield, its armor check penalty applies to your attack rolls.
Special: Natural weapons are considered light weapons.Wouldn't this also mean that you couldn't use Weapon Finesse and touch spells or weapon-like spells?
That is a very logical point. Fortunately, the qualifier "Special: Natural weapons are considered light weapons," demonstrates that this feat is not mean to work solely with manufactured weapons. Instead, the intention was the weapon-like attack had to be light or count as light. Unarmed strike is also considered a light weapon. We can generalize that in this case, a touch spell would count as a light weapon, too, since a touch spell could be delivered via unarmed strike.
That is a very logical point. Fortunately, the qualifier "Special: Natural weapons are considered light weapons," demonstrates that this feat is not mean to work solely with manufactured weapons. Instead, the intention was the weapon-like attack had to be light or count as light. Unarmed strike is also considered a light weapon. We can generalize that in this case, a touch spell would count as a light weapon, too, since a touch spell could be delivered via unarmed strike.Something else just occurred to me.
In the same vein as abilities like Arcane Strike that affect a character’s weapons, abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon” almost never work with special abilities because such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon.”Weapon Finesse (Combat)
You are trained in using your agility in melee combat, as opposed to brute strength.Benefit: With a light weapon, rapier, whip, or spiked chain made for a creature of your size category, you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on attack rolls. If you carry a shield, its armor check penalty applies to your attack rolls.
Special: Natural weapons are considered light weapons.Wouldn't this also mean that you couldn't use Weapon Finesse and touch spells or weapon-like spells?
But only when Joe Sorcerermonk casts Chill Touch and tries to use unarmed strike to deliver it and not when Rincewind the Wizzard is just trying to touch someone with his hand to deliver it?
Well, Unarmed Attacks are expressly called out to work "like manufactured weapons" save for an exhaustive list of default exceptions.
Does you have a citation for this? As far as I'm aware, in every instance in the rules, except one, unarmed strikes are explicitly separate from manufactured and natural weapons and has its own rules. This was a specific rules change from 3.5, probably to undercut some monk shenanigans with damage dice. As a consequence, however, this has meant that, per RAW, unarmed strikes don't benefit from a large number of spells or effects, because they often call out benefiting manufactured and natural weapons.l, but don't include unarmed strikes in the list.
If you have a citation that "expressly called to work like manufactured weapons," I would be very interested in seeing it.
I suspect that's referring to the Weapon Master Fighter archetype.Yes, that. Sorry, I forgot about the Weapon Master class ability.
I mean specifically the Weapon Master Fighter archetype.
Thanks for clarifying for me!
Remember that it's the Weapon Focus (and similar) feats that allow you to select subjects that aren't exactly manufactured weapons (according to their shorthand), such as rays, grapple, and so on, of which the archetype is not.
It is as they've said in the FAQ:
Certain special abilities (for instance rays, kinetic blasts, and mystic bolts) can specifically be selected with feats like Weapon Focus and Improved Critical. They still aren’t considered a type of weapon for other rules; they are not part of any weapon group and don’t qualify for the effects of fighter weapon training, warpriest sacred weapon, magus arcane pool, paladin divine bond, or any other such ability.
The Weapon Master's benefits only apply to a single weapon, true, but since the FAQ calls out Weapon Training as a class feature, it would count as such here (since it has the same exact name).
The Weapon Master's benefits only apply to a single weapon, true, but since the FAQ calls out Weapon Training as a class feature, it would count as such here (since it has the same exact name).
This is not necessarily true, at least the naming part. It does explicitly mention "other such abilities" and since the other abilities listed are all class abilities, one can infer that they mean "other class abilities".
Anyway, back to the naming thing; Paizo has done things like replace class abilities with a similar class ability under the same name, but they don't qualify as the ability replaced. The Fighter is infamous for replacing Weapon Training with a limited Weapon Training, or swapping it for a delayed Weapon Training at another level, but they don't qualify for things like Gloves of the Duelist.
The Weapon Master's benefits only apply to a single weapon, true, but since the FAQ calls out Weapon Training as a class feature, it would count as such here (since it has the same exact name).This is not necessarily true, at least the naming part. It does explicitly mention "other such abilities" and since the other abilities listed are all class abilities, one can infer that they mean "other class abilities".
Anyway, back to the naming thing; Paizo has done things like replace class abilities with a similar class ability under the same name, but they don't qualify as the ability replaced. The Fighter is infamous for replacing Weapon Training with a limited Weapon Training, or swapping it for a delayed Weapon Training at another level, but they don't qualify for things like Gloves of the Duelist.
Clearly it's for class abilities only, but I bolded it for completeness, not for the other reason.
Of course, based on the Weapon Training FAQ, as well as abilities that are based upon it (for example, based on your interpretation, Weapon Master's Weapon Training wouldn't count for selecting Advanced Weapon Training abilities), I'd say it certainly does constitute being the Weapon Training class feature.
More specifically, following this FAQ here:
It depends on how the archetype's ability is worded. If the archetype ability says it works like the standard ability, it counts as that ability. If the archetype's ability requires you to make a specific choice for the standard ability, it counts as that ability. Otherwise, the archetype ability doesn't count as the standard ability. (It doesn't matter if the archetype's ability name is different than the standard class ability it is replacing; it is the description and game mechanics of the archetype ability that matter.)
Example: The dragoon (fighter) archetype (Ultimate Combat) has an ability called "spear training," which requires the dragoon to select "spears" as his weapon training group, and refers to his weapon training bonus (even though this bonus follows a slightly different progression than standard weapon training). Therefore, this ability counts as weapon training for abilities that improve weapon training, such as gloves of dueling (Advanced Player's Guide), which increase the wearer's weapon training bonus.
Example: The archer (fighter) archetype gets several abilities (such as "expert archer") which replace weapon training and do not otherwise refer to the weapon training ability. Therefore, this ability does not count as weapon training for abilities that improve weapon training (such as gloves of dueling). This is the case even for the "expert archer," ability which has a bonus that improves every 4 fighter levels, exactly like weapon training.
In that FAQ, we get two examples, one which is an ability that specializes in a specific group only (or some other similar restriction), but otherwise refers to the original feature, and therefore counts. In the second, we get an ability that doesn't refer to the original feature. Even though it scales exactly the same, and does work with a specific set of groups (as the Dragoon), it doesn't count.
Now, based on that interpretation, the Weapon Training from Weapon Master actually functions on both scales; it references Weapon Training by name (similar to how a UCMonk's Flurry of Blows is considered the same feature as a standard Monk's Flurry of Blows for the purposes of replacing them via archetype), and focuses on a specific group (or in this case, a single specific weapon), so on those grounds, it would count; not to mention the other abilities (such as Advanced Weapon Training) which do work in conjunction with it, as the original feature itself.
However, because it doesn't say things like "functions as the original feature, except X," it wouldn't count as Weapon Training for the purposes of enhancing it; but that doesn't make sense, otherwise as mentioned above, Advanced Weapon Training wouldn't be compatible with it.
So really, it's a matter of table variance, as both sides have merit, though in my opinion, the side of it "for" functioning as a Weapon Training feature has more evidence to support its claim (i.e. Advanced Weapon Training validity), so to that end, I would vote for the subject that has more valid evidence to its claim.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Scanning through and from the point of view that all these effects worked with spells and effects, what is the surprises?
The only thing I think I've seen so far may be Weapon Finesse failing to work with Touch attacks unless you conflate Natural Attacks and Unarmed Attacks to permit it to work.
Are there any other surprises to be found?
Scanning through and from the point of view that all these effects worked with spells and effects, what is the surprises?
The only thing I think I've seen so far may be Weapon Finesse failing to work with Touch attacks unless you conflate Natural Attacks and Unarmed Attacks to permit it to work.
Are there any other surprises to be found?
I'm still not entirely sure if I'm clear on whether Inspire Courage and/or a Medium Champion's shared seance ability would work for a kinetic blast.
I had this argument at a game recently (I was playing an elemental annihilator, another character was playing a bard, and another was playing a medium). The GM was new to Pathfinder so just let us argue it out until we came to a consensus. We figured that the Inspire Courage would work but the Medium's shared seance would not.... but now I'm not so sure.
OH, and Arcane Strike doesn't (does? should?) work for natural (re: non-manufactured) weapons?
As far as Weapon Finesse is concerned, I was surprised about that as well (it was one of those things that we all just assumed would work for touch spells). If Weapon Finesse wouldn't work, and I assume Weapon Focus wouldn't either... is there much a wizard can do to increase their chances of hitting? Maybe an Amulet of Mighty Fists (maybe? dunno)... but that may be a post for a different topic.
Scanning through and from the point of view that all these effects worked with spells and effects, what is the surprises?
The only thing I think I've seen so far may be Weapon Finesse failing to work with Touch attacks unless you conflate Natural Attacks and Unarmed Attacks to permit it to work.
Are there any other surprises to be found?
I'm still not entirely sure if I'm clear on whether Inspire Courage and/or a Medium Champion's shared seance ability would work for a kinetic blast.
I had this argument at a game recently (I was playing an elemental annihilator, another character was playing a bard, and another was playing a medium). The GM was new to Pathfinder so just let us argue it out until we came to a consensus. We figured that the Inspire Courage would work but the Medium's shared seance would not.... but now I'm not so sure.
OH, and Arcane Strike doesn't (does? should?) work for natural (re: non-manufactured) weapons?
As far as Weapon Finesse is concerned, I was surprised about that as well (it was one of those things that we all just assumed would work for touch spells). If Weapon Finesse wouldn't work, and I assume Weapon Focus wouldn't either... is there much a wizard can do to increase their chances of hitting? Maybe an Amulet of Mighty Fists (maybe? dunno)... but that may be a post for a different topic.
From what I can read, I don't see why the Seance wouldn't work for Kinetic Blasts and the like. It references "non-spell damage rolls," and Kinetic Blasts aren't spells (they are only treated as spells for the purposes of dispel magic and the like), so, I don't see why it wouldn't apply.
But, I don't really play Psionics, because they're extremely confusing and add a whole new level of unnecessary depth (at least, in my opinion), so YMMV.
As for Arcane Strike, per the FAQ, it doesn't because of how "weapons" in general are shorthand for "manufactured weapons." Silly, but to be honest, it would create a lot of overpowered subjects if that were the case.
Weapon Finesse seems like an inconsequential result of the FAQ, since they state that special abilities count as weapons that "can specifically be selected with feats like Weapon Focus or Improved Critical," and Weapon Finesse is a blanket feat that applies to a subset of weapons.
Ironically enough, if you have a special ability that deals Slashing damage, it can be selected with Slashing Grace, though I have a feeling the mechanics would fail upon themselves, meaning this wouldn't be a viable choice.
|
|
I don't really play Psionics, because they're extremely confusing and add a whole new level of unnecessary depth (at least, in my opinion), so YMMV.
Pathfinder doesn't have Psionics.
Pathfinder does have Psychic Magic (not really different from Divine or Arcane magic), but the Kineticist doesn't dabble in that.
A Kinetic Blast is a spell-like ability, no different than a Sorcerer/Wizard/Cleric's elemental dart.
|
The FAQ calls out that certain things don't fall into a Fighter weapon group, so they can't benefit from Weapon Training, but what about the Weapon Master archetype that doesn't choose a group, but a specific weapon?
You can definitely choose weapons not in weapon groups for the Weapon Master archetype. Not sure how liberal this can be applied, but consider that many of the class bonuses will offer no benefit to the more unusual weapon selections. For example, it replaces bravery with bonuses against disarm and sunder vs your chosen weapon, and further bonuses to spell saves for your weapon (like heat metal). This ability would be a total loss if you tried to be a Ray weapon master, for example.
I might consider it for a Gesalt character, where we had to select two classes to simotaneously level, but I think this would be counter productive for a multi-class character.
So no more paladins with magic missile.I never considered those discussions to be serious anyways.
They are serious. Just like questions about:
Can I ranged flank?Whats the DC to jump a 10' pit?
Call I spell recall my quickened shocking grasp for a single arcane point?
And a host of other FAQ questions that seem obvious to many.
So no more paladins with magic missile.I never considered those discussions to be serious anyways.Not only were they not serious, they were never practiced/used, and plus almost impossible to make useful without serious money investments (which requires high levels).
Did I also mention they were probably the most inoptimal thing ever?
My Dwarven Paladin with his ring of forcefangs would greatly disagree with you. Not only was it pretty inexpensive, it was quite potent to hit the evil creature with five 1d4+12 missiles,
|
So no more paladins with magic missile.I never considered those discussions to be serious anyways.They are serious. Just like questions about:
Can I ranged flank?
Whats the DC to jump a 10' pit?
Call I spell recall my quickened shocking grasp for a single arcane point?And a host of other FAQ questions that seem obvious to many.
Each of those I considered serious.
I did not with this.
So no more paladins with magic missile.I never considered those discussions to be serious anyways.They are serious. Just like questions about:
Can I ranged flank?
Whats the DC to jump a 10' pit?
Call I spell recall my quickened shocking grasp for a single arcane point?And a host of other FAQ questions that seem obvious to many.
Each of those I considered serious.
I did not with this.
My point is that just because you didn't consider the question serious, doesn't mean others don't. Even if the answer was 'obvious' (including the obvious answer to those other questions as well), doesn't mean it isn't a serious question.
Contributor
|
Did "FAQ Friday" turn into "FAQ Monthly"? Why is the FAQ always so slow?
On top of what others have noted, given the following...
-The heavy preponderance of recent drama
-The loss of one of the site's only two moderators
-The community's usual reaction to FAQs
...I believe the team decided to skip over this week's FAQ Friday.
If some FAQs weren't simply terrible and actually Errata(and the Errata didn't have terrible parts when published as well)... >.>
That's about thirty percent a joke, by the way.
|
Contributor
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If some FAQs weren't simply terrible and actually Errata(and the Errata didn't have terrible parts when published as well)... >.>
That's about thirty percent a joke, by the way.
Be that as it may (and there are certainly some FAQs/errata that I find thoroughly disappointing)... the abusive behavior that has happened in reaction to FAQs and errata is unjustifiable. No matter how terrible they are.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That I can agree with.
Did "FAQ Friday" turn into "FAQ Monthly"? Why is the FAQ always so slow?On top of what others have noted, given the following...
-The heavy preponderance of recent drama
-The loss of one of the site's only two moderators
-The community's usual reaction to FAQs...I believe the team decided to skip over this week's FAQ Friday.
Perhaps. But it's just one of many theories, and Paizo is a big company; I don't think they'll let some bit of drama (as well as clear misunderstanding) get in the way of what they want to do, both as a company, and the direction they wish to steer the game toward. If people don't like it, that's fine, they can find another game to enjoy (perhaps something else that Paizo has released?), or houserule it out. Sure, PFS gets the short stick, but guess what, that's in the PFS "contract", you basically signed away your right to divulge the "bad" rules and fixes from the "good" rules and fixes. It's not exactly nice or fair, but them's the breaks; they made their bed, now they have to lie in it.
Anyway, bringing back a more optimistic approach, I'd prefer to think that they're busy with other, more important things (even if it's as you've described) to work on a FAQ Friday. I mean, it hasn't really been a tradition, it's only really been active for, I'd estimate, about 3-4 months (could be more, could be less, that's about how often I've seen it in action). It's not like they've made it a very high priority in the past (as evidenced by SKR's testimony on the factor), so the ideal that they simply "missed it" shouldn't raise some cause for alarm any more than them simply mistyping "a" instead of "an" in a published hardcover.
There could also be the factor that there simply isn't anything currently worthwhile to be FAQ'd. I mean, the things that people ask to be FAQ'd probably won't because said things should simply be left to the GM to adjudicate, as is the case with the Overrun rules (they're quite broken, and no amount of FAQ/Errata will fix it), the effects of food (or lack thereof for creatures), and so on. There's also the matter of things that simply require errata, as I've demonstrated above, and that sort of stuff simply shouldn't be wasted on a FAQ.
It's too soon to tell as to what the reason is. (Besides, isn't Mark Seifter in charge of the "FAQ Friday" stuff?)
**EDIT**
And why are we discussing this sort of thing in a thread that has already had its official answer given? Feels like this sort of thing should've been its own thread.
|
Contributor
|
Other stuff
It's too soon to tell as to what the reason is. (Besides, isn't Mark Seifter in charge of the "FAQ Friday" stuff?)
Indeed - I merely meant that those things were likely a factor, not the entirety of the cause. I should have been clearer. Sorry!
And why are we discussing this sort of thing in a thread that has already had its official answer given? Feels like this sort of thing should've been its own thread.
I was just about to recommend this, in fact. ^_^
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
The heavy preponderance of recent drama.
Totally missed the drama and that a moderator left.
But I will say this, from my view the drama level is a fraction of where it used to be 1 year ago and another fraction from 2 years ago. All the errata has either gotten the infighting to stop (because we have official answers) or those that hated the errata and just wanted to complain about it have mostly left or accepted the errata/FAQ. All that results in my view a nice forum with discussion, support, advice and awesomeness.